SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Packt reports that Gab's Dissenter browser extension was removed from Mozilla's Firefox add-ons on April 10th (people already using it can continue to do so), and was booted from Google's Chrome browser the next day. Gab pitches itself as an anti-censorship social media platform that only prohibits speech that is illegal. Their Dissenter browser extension and associated website allow people to share comments about any webpage, giving users the ability to share comments on articles, videos, etc., regardless of whether or not the website hosting the content has a comments section. Mozilla's rationale for the ban was that Dissenter was being used to promote violence, hate speech, and discrimination, but they failed to show any examples to bolster that claim. Gab plans to develop their own browser in response.
(Score: 4, Informative) by takyon on Saturday April 13 2019, @06:32PM (11 children)
A GM script might be easier than rolling out a new browser and maintaining it.
Alternatively, they could just find a browser fork that lets people install unsigned extensions or whatever.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 4, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 13 2019, @06:49PM (4 children)
I like the way you think.
Signed,
Very Honest Internet Hacker
(Score: 2) by takyon on Saturday April 13 2019, @06:59PM
More like:
Signed,
Windows 10 S Mode [microsoft.com] User
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 13 2019, @08:05PM (2 children)
As long as someone can get their hands on the plugin, they can install it and use it all they want.
No one is stopping anyone from doing so.
I use Firefox and if a plugin I try to install isn't from Mozilla, it asks me if I really want to install it. So, the choice is mine all the way.
That Mozilla and Google don't want to use their disk space and network bandwidth to *host* and *distribute* that software is up to them. If you don't like it, don't use Firefox or Chrome.
But neither platform is stopping you from running said plugin -- it will run just as well as it ever did on those browsers.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 14 2019, @08:12PM
"Mozilla requires all extensions to be signed by Mozilla in order for them to be installable in Release and Beta versions of Firefox."
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Add-ons/Extension_Signing [mozilla.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 17 2019, @04:34AM
But sure as shit they better bake a cake when asked, right?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by jmorris on Saturday April 13 2019, @08:34PM (3 children)
Yup. Force Moz Corp to boil the sea, ban greasemonkey and any similar extension that allows unsigned code to run, go full iProduct. And induce the mother of ragestrokes in the userbase.
Yes, at this point I'm openly rooting for the destruction of Mozilla Corp and Firefox. From fanboy to implacable foe, behold the power of hate. They hated me, so now I return the favor.... with interest.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday April 14 2019, @05:35AM (2 children)
You don't need to hate them you know. At the absolute worst, you can just fork the code, can't you? And knock out whatever bits are in charge of enforcing extension signatures. Then tell all your friends (ppppphttthahahahahaha! ...sorry, sorry) about it, distribute the source and/or binaries to them along with the extension if you want, and have fun.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Sunday April 14 2019, @08:16AM
But before you do yet another fork, please have a look at the forks that already exist.
I'm using Waterfox and I'm quite happy with it.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 14 2019, @10:58PM
IceCat did this for Firefox.
Their mobile version is far better.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by darkfeline on Saturday April 13 2019, @09:39PM (1 child)
More specifically, they can just fork Firefox or Chromium. Ah, the wonders of FOSS.
But really, this is about an extension being removed from the Official Extension Store TM. Both Firefox and Chromium allow installing extensions from alternative sources last I checked, so couldn't they just host their extensions as a download on their website?
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 14 2019, @08:14PM
"Mozilla requires all extensions to be signed by Mozilla in order for them to be installable in Release and Beta versions of Firefox."
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Add-ons/Extension_Signing [mozilla.org]